TMLR 2023

Where Did the Gap Go? Reassessing the Long-Range Graph Benchmark

Jan Tönshoff Martin Ritzert Eran Rosenbluth Martin Grohe

Main figure for Where Did the Gap Go? Reassessing the Long-Range Graph Benchmark

Abstract

The recent Long-Range Graph Benchmark (LRGB, Dwivedi et al. 2022) introduced a set of graph learning tasks strongly dependent on long-range interaction between vertices. Empirical evidence suggests that on these tasks Graph Transformers significantly outperform Message Passing GNNs (MPGNNs). In this paper, we carefully reevaluate multiple MPGNN baselines as well as the Graph Transformer GPS (Ramp\'a\v{s}ek et al. 2022) on LRGB. Through a rigorous empirical analysis, we demonstrate that the reported performance gap is overestimated due to suboptimal hyperparameter choices. It is noteworthy that across multiple datasets the performance gap completely vanishes after basic hyperparameter optimization. In addition, we discuss the impact of lacking feature normalization for LRGB's vision datasets and highlight a spurious implementation of LRGB's link prediction metric. The principal aim of our paper is to establish a higher standard of empirical rigor within the graph machine learning community.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 4 datasets

Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).

LRGB

#ModelMAE ↓Paper
1
GCN
actual #1 vs paper #31 30 places worse
0.2460 ±0.0007
actual #1 vs paper #31 30 places worse
paper 0.2460 ±0.0007

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.2460 ±0.0007 Δ at pub 0.0028 Δ today 0.0039
2
IPR-MPNN
0.2422 ±0.0007
3
TANGO-GPS
0.2422 ±0.0014
5
GIN
0.2429 ±0.0019
7
GatedGCN
actual #7 vs paper #57 50 places worse
0.2477 ±0.0009
actual #7 vs paper #57 50 places worse
paper 0.2477 ±0.0009
paper 0.2477 ±0.0009 Δ at pub 0.0046 Δ today 0.0046
49
GINE
actual #49 vs paper #49
0.2473 ±0.0017
actual #49 vs paper #49
paper 0.2473 ±0.0017
paper 0.2473 ±0.0017 Δ at pub 0.0111
85
GPS
actual #85 vs paper #96 11 places worse
0.2500 ±0.0005
best reported
actual #85 vs paper #96 11 places worse
paper 0.2509 ±0.0014

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.2509 ±0.0014 Δ today 0.0009
201
MLP
0.4351 ±0.0008
#ModelAP ↑Paper
1
S^2GCN
0.7311 ±0.0066
2
S4G
0.7293 ±0.0004
3
BuNN
0.7276 ±0.0065
4
GCN
actual #4 vs paper #49 45 places worse
0.6860 ±0.0050
actual #4 vs paper #49 45 places worse
paper 0.6860 ±0.0050
paper 0.6860 ±0.0050 Δ at pub 0.0237 Δ today 0.0401
26
GIN
0.7059 ±0.0089
34
GatedGCN
actual #34 vs paper #58 24 places worse
0.6765 ±0.0047
actual #34 vs paper #58 24 places worse
paper 0.6765 ±0.0047
paper 0.6765 ±0.0047 Δ at pub 0.0130 Δ today 0.0241
78
GINE
actual #78 vs paper #78
0.6621 ±0.0067
actual #78 vs paper #78
paper 0.6621 ±0.0067
paper 0.6621 ±0.0067 Δ at pub 0.0275
87
GPS
actual #87 vs paper #94 7 places worse
0.6562 ±0.0115
best reported
actual #87 vs paper #94 7 places worse
paper 0.6534 ±0.0091

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.6534 ±0.0091 Δ at pub 0.0028
181
MLP
0.4060 ±0.0021
#ModelF1 ↑Paper
1
NeuralWalker
0.4912 ±0.0042
2
PPGT
0.4641 ±0.0033
3
CRaWl
0.4588 ±0.0079
This paper
14
GPS
0.4440 ±0.0065
This paper
41
GatedGCN
0.3880 ±0.0040
This paper
42
Gated-GCN
0.3880 ±0.0040
75
GINE
0.2718 ±0.0054
This paper
81
GCN
actual #81 vs paper #83 2 places worse
0.2380 ±0.0160
best reported
actual #81 vs paper #83 2 places worse
paper 0.2078 ±0.0031
paper 0.2078 ±0.0031 Δ today 0.0302
93
MLP
0.1140 ±0.0230
#ModelF1 ↑Paper
1
FloydNet
0.4901
2
CRaWl
0.4588 ±0.0079
3
GPS
actual #3 vs paper #14 11 places worse
0.4440 ±0.0065
best reported
actual #3 vs paper #14 11 places worse
paper 0.3884 ±0.0055
paper 0.3884 ±0.0055 Δ today 0.0556
10
Exphormer
actual #10 vs paper #27 17 places worse
0.3960 ±0.0027
best reported
actual #10 vs paper #27 17 places worse
paper 0.3430 ±0.0008
paper 0.3430 ±0.0008 Δ today 0.0530
16
GatedGCN
actual #16 vs paper #32 16 places worse
0.3880 ±0.0040
best reported
actual #16 vs paper #32 16 places worse
paper 0.2922 ±0.0018
paper 0.2922 ±0.0018 Δ today 0.0958
33
Gated-GCN
0.2922 ±0.0018
34
GINE
actual #34 vs paper #40 6 places worse
0.2718 ±0.0054
best reported
actual #34 vs paper #40 6 places worse
paper 0.2125 ±0.0009
paper 0.2125 ±0.0009 Δ today 0.0593
45
GCN
actual #45 vs paper #52 7 places worse
0.2078 ±0.0031
best reported
actual #45 vs paper #52 7 places worse
paper 0.1338 ±0.0007
paper 0.1338 ±0.0007 Δ today 0.0740
74
MLP
0.0310 ±0.0160
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers) Best at pub — reported value improved over the best known when published Improved at pub — later paper surpassed this result Best today — OK at publication; today's leaderboard best is elsewhere